Let us have intelligent debate where every voice is equally heard
Democracies were invented as a poor second-best solution
because benevolent dictators do not exist.
(If you ever find one, you should keep her.)
QuoteLet us have intelligent debate where every voice is equally heard
I think BTS is still a benevolent dictatorship at this stage.
Does anyone have a different POV?
I don't believe in democracy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_democracy#Economic_criticisms). I'm glad we don't have one, otherwise we'd be subject to the whims of individuals that do not understand the technology or the economic implications of the technology.
...
I don't believe in democracy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_democracy#Economic_criticisms). I'm glad we don't have one, otherwise we'd be subject to the whims of individuals that do not understand the technology or the economic implications of the technology.
I agree....
It currently takes 15% approval to elect a delegate.
I3 stake, BM stake & your (Stan) stake = circa 15% range imo.
So the 101 delegates may be currently selected by Bytemaster.
Hence my conclusion of benevolent dictatorship.
Which is fine. I think most people get that. I'm still a significant investor.
The OP 'BTSTV' was 'Decentralised Application' who I believe is you Stan. So as I said I'm trying to get feedback from other BitShares community members about how they would define BTS at present.
I don't believe in democracy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_democracy#Economic_criticisms). I'm glad we don't have one, otherwise we'd be subject to the whims of individuals that do not understand the technology or the economic implications of the technology.
I agree....
It currently takes 15% approval to elect a delegate.
I3 stake, BM stake & your (Stan) stake = circa 15% range imo.
So the 101 delegates may be currently selected by Bytemaster.
Hence my conclusion of benevolent dictatorship.
Which is fine. I think most people get that. I'm still a significant investor.
The OP 'BTSTV' was 'Decentralised Application' who I believe is you Stan. So as I said I'm trying to get feedback from other BitShares community members about how they would define BTS at present.
Why, thank you, but no, I can't keep up with DA. :)
What we've got is an ideal case of "silence means consent". If there is ever a case when apathy turns to anger, then the majority has the ability to remove the benevolent dictator by raising as little as 5% or 10% worth of opposition. That is less power than the captain of a ship has. And captains are given such authority for good reasons.
I would never set sail on a ship commanded by its passengers.
I would never bet on a ball team coached by its fans.
I would not invest in a company directed by its shareholders.
All is swell.
If not, sell.
:)
its not about profit,it's about trust.fuck you fools
You are correct, it is about trust first and foremost.
Dan fulfilled his promise to get a minimally functional DPOS to market with a hard cap on the total coins available (no dilution). And the BitAsset price feed mechanism worked which was a bonus not a promise. BTSX trading on BTER is proof of promise fulfillment.
That was all that was promised.
100% trust preserved, next.
If you want to continue with the BTSX verion 4.20 (with a hard cap on total coins), then you may continue running your delegate of that version. Nobody, besides the Bolivian government is going to try stop you. Your dilution free BTSX v4.20 is yours and nobody can ever change that forever! You are lucky to have this freedom, and yet you are unhappy? Maybe if you experienced some good old fashioned Bolivian slavery, then you would have a different perspective, but I digress.
You should be thanking Dan for honoring his promise instead of:its not about profit,it's about trust.fuck you fools
I know you are right. I've been telling them newtree for a month before dilution talks started. They have their own vision. I tried but I can't help them.
我试过,但我不能帮助他们
It’s not Dan’s fault that delegates who are free to do as they please choose to run the new 8% dilution version of BitShares, and not the old v4.20 that you like.
Would you force the free delegates at gunpoint to run a version of BitShares that they would rather not?
What kind of person does that make you?
People like you are the reason why I would rather choose to run the new free-market version of BitShares over the one where you force delegates against their will to do your selfish bidding (secure the system for you, build smart phone apps for you, promote your favorite version of BitShares that Dan made for you).
Dan already fulfilled his promise to construct BitSharesTyranny, now his next project is called BitSharesDemocracy.
And you currently own both versions, and are mad why?
______________________________________________Please fill in the blank, I love learning the mechanisms of psychopathy.
Thank you Dan, for fulfilling your previous commitment. Good luck in your future adventures (of which I am also interested in being a part of).
You prefer the hard capped version of BitSharesX.
Well, you are in luck sweetheart, because what you want is already invented (BTSX v4.20), and you already have it. And you are mad why?
What I want still has never seen the light of day, and yet I am happy?
Why?
because I'm a fool.
Could you ever be happy?
BitShares come in many flavors (versions) (they put them out weekly practically), and you are free to choose any one you like. Just be aware that if you choose to use a certain one, then people might hate you and call you names.
BitShares - where choosing your flavors will bring out the haters
I don't believe in democracy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_democracy#Economic_criticisms). I'm glad we don't have one, otherwise we'd be subject to the whims of individuals that do not understand the technology or the economic implications of the technology.